REVIEW 2 cited by
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
GPT-4 and Safety Case Generation: An Exploratory Analysis
read the original abstract
In the ever-evolving landscape of software engineering, the emergence of large language models (LLMs) and conversational interfaces, exemplified by ChatGPT, is nothing short of revolutionary. While their potential is undeniable across various domains, this paper sets out on a captivating expedition to investigate their uncharted territory, the exploration of generating safety cases. In this paper, our primary objective is to delve into the existing knowledge base of GPT-4, focusing specifically on its understanding of the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN), a well-established notation allowing to visually represent safety cases. Subsequently, we perform four distinct experiments with GPT-4. These experiments are designed to assess its capacity for generating safety cases within a defined system and application domain. To measure the performance of GPT-4 in this context, we compare the results it generates with ground-truth safety cases created for an X-ray system system and a Machine-Learning (ML)-enabled component for tire noise recognition (TNR) in a vehicle. This allowed us to gain valuable insights into the model's generative capabilities. Our findings indicate that GPT-4 demonstrates the capacity to produce safety arguments that are moderately accurate and reasonable. Furthermore, it exhibits the capability to generate safety cases that closely align with the semantic content of the reference safety cases used as ground-truths in our experiments.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Evaluating Assurance Cases as Text-Attributed Graphs for Structure and Provenance Analysis
Graph neural networks on assurance case graphs reach 0.76 ROC-AUC for link prediction and 0.94 F1 for distinguishing human from LLM-generated cases, with observed differences in hierarchical linking patterns.
-
Automating Quality Assessment with NLP of LLM-Generated Defeaters
BERT embeddings and meta-classifiers trained on 172 expert-annotated defeaters from two assurance cases achieve F1≈0.84 in predicting quality ratings, outperforming the low inter-rater agreement (κ<0.442) between huma...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.